Report 717
Report #717 Skillset: Telepathy Skill: New Org: Pyromancers Status: Completed Nov 2011 Furies' Decision: We will consider these solutions further. We do not like solution 2 or 3. We will probably implement a modified version of solution 1 and try to work out something to fill in the other areas that are lacking in Telepathy. Problem: Oftentimes, even for the non-combatants, Telekinesis (TK) is chosen over Telepathy (TP) for the amount of utility available in the former's skillset. From the simple PsychicLift to the grand ForceField, TK far outshines TP from a utility stand point alone, much less when combat is taken into perspective as well. A report is thus made to hopefully introduce some more mechanical benefits to TP to encourage its choice for newcomers to any mage guild who, more often than not, just get pointed towards the benefits TK gives since TP has nothing suitable to offer in consideration. 0 R: 0 Solution #1: Create a new ability desirable for roleplayers on a locked channel. Have this skill enable the caster to psychically understand any spoken language, much like the Illithoid. 0 R: 0 Solution #2: Create a new ability desirable for influencers on a locked channel. Have this skill increase the amount of esteem and experience gained from influencing. 0 R: 0 Solution #3: Create a new ability desirable for bashers on a locked channel. Have this skill give the caster a percent chance to deal a burst of psychic damage after a staffcast/blast attack done on a denizen (mind, only denizens). Flavoured around the concept of an afterthought. Player Comments: ---on 11/9 @ 03:54 writes: Ideally, solution one AND another solution would be introduced to TP much as how TK has two neat utility skills in the skillset. If folk have some neater utility ideas, feel free to speak up. Just keep in mind TP's flavour! ---on 11/9 @ 14:44 writes: While I agree with the basic premise of the report, each solution fails to provide justifications for its proposed new skill. Those of us on this side of the game can infer them easily enough, but you may have an easier time getting the report past the admin if, after you describe the ability, you write one or two sentences explaining why each individual skill would be needed/desired. I have just noticed that reports tend to get rejected when they have three very different solutions without explanations of how each one addresses the problem. ---on 11/9 @ 20:22 writes: As most reports have a tendency to ramble, keeping the ideas as proposed short in the report itself is desirable while specifics are outlined in the comments section, As for providing justification for each new skill, their interpretation can vary widely from person to person. From a mechanical point of view, the problem is clearly stated in the corresponding section. From a flavour perspective, solutions one and three are either stated already or obvious. For the second solution, the Telepath in question already has an ability to subvert will. Applying a stronger influence is obvious, but repeated so often, it is dull (though welcome, if no other option persists). Changing the reward from stronger influence to an increased gain from influence instead would be a spin away, but still retains close proximity to the original flavour of the idea. ---on 11/14 @ 23:10 writes: I don't really like any of these solutions. TK is picked because it provides a huge amount of tankiness in PvE. I had envisioned something similar in regards to providing tankiness in influencing-- for example, a 15%-25% reduction in ego costs when -influencing- an NPC, as well as a buff to influencing in general, when the channel is locked. This would give it great appeal to the other end of the playerbase, the influencing section. ---on 11/14 @ 23:11 writes: The RP justification is clear, a Telepath has the ability to sense moods and 'steer the conversation' appropriately, reducing costs and making their influencing more effective. ---on 11/19 @ 09:06 writes: Hrm. I like Xenthos' idea though if I had to choose from the given solutions, I would go with 1 and 2 perhaps (no reason why they would be mutually exclusive). ---on 11/27 @ 23:52 writes: I like Xentho's solution as well. Otherwise, Sol 2.